In historical linguistics, vowel breaking, vowel fracture,[1] or diphthongization is the sound change of a monophthong into a diphthong or triphthong.
Types
editVowel breaking may be unconditioned or conditioned. It may be triggered by the presence of another sound, by stress, or in no particular way.
Assimilation
editVowel breaking is sometimes defined as a subtype of diphthongization, when it refers to harmonic (assimilatory) process that involves diphthongization triggered by a following vowel or consonant.
The original pure vowel typically breaks into two segments. The first segment matches the original vowel, and the second segment is harmonic with the nature of the triggering vowel or consonant. For example, the second segment may be /u/ (a back vowel) if the following vowel or consonant is back (such as velar or pharyngeal), and the second segment may be /i/ (a front vowel) if the following vowel or consonant is front (such as palatal).
Thus, vowel breaking, in the restricted sense, can be viewed as an example of assimilation of a vowel to a following vowel or consonant.
Unconditioned
editVowel breaking is sometimes not assimilatory and is then not triggered by a neighboring sound. That was the case with the Great Vowel Shift in English in which all cases of /i?/ and /u?/ changed to diphthongs.
Stress
editVowel breaking sometimes occurs only in stressed syllables. For instance, Vulgar Latin open-mid /?/ and /?/ changed to diphthongs only when they were stressed.
Indo-European languages
editEnglish
editVowel breaking is a very common sound change in the history of the English language, occurring at least three times (with some varieties adding a fourth) listed here in reverse chronological order:
Southern American English
editVowel breaking is characteristic of the "Southern drawl" of Southern American English, where the short front vowels have developed a glide up to [j], and then in some areas back down to schwa: pat [p?j?t], pet [p?j?t], pit [p?j?t].[2]
Great Vowel Shift
editThe Great Vowel Shift changed the long vowels /i? u?/ to diphthongs, which became Modern English /a? a?/.
- Old English īs > Modern English ice /a?s/
- Old English hūs > Modern English house /ha?s/
Middle English
editIn early Middle English, a vowel /i/ was inserted between a front vowel and a following /h/ (pronounced [?] in this context), and a vowel /u/ was inserted between a back vowel and a following /h/ (pronounced [x] in this context).
That is a prototypical example of the narrow sense of "vowel breaking" as described above: the original vowel breaks into a diphthong that assimilates to the following consonant, gaining a front /i/ before a palatal consonant and /u/ before a velar consonant.
Old English
editIn Old English, two forms of harmonic vowel breaking occurred: breaking and retraction and back mutation.
In prehistoric Old English, breaking and retraction changed stressed short and long front vowels i, e, ? to short and long diphthongs spelled io, eo, ea when followed by h or by r, l + another consonant (short vowels only), and sometimes w (only for certain short vowels):[3]
- Proto-Germanic *fallan > Anglo-Frisian *f?llan > Old English feallan "fall"
- PG *ertō > OE eorte "earth"
- PG *lizan? > OE liornian "learn"
In late prehistoric Old English, back mutation changed short front i, e, ? to short diphthongs spelled io, eo, ea before a back vowel in the next syllable if the intervening consonant was of a certain nature. The specific nature of the consonants that trigger back umlaut or block it varied from dialect to dialect.
Old Norse
editProto-Germanic stressed short e becomes ja or (before u) j? regularly in Old Norse except after w, r, l. Examples are:
- PG *ek(a) "I" → (east) ON jak, Swedish jag, Danish and Norwegian Bokm?l jeg, and Icelandic ek → ég (but Jutlandic ?, a, Nynorsk eg).
- PG *hertōn "heart" → ON hjarta, Swedish hj?rta, Faroese hjarta, Norwegian Nynorsk hjarta, Danish hjerte
- PG *ertō "earth" → Proto-Norse *ertū → ON j?re, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian jord, Faroese j?re
According to some scholars,[4] the diphthongisation of e is an unconditioned sound change, whereas other scholars speak about epenthesis[5] or umlaut.[6]
German and Yiddish
editThe long high vowels of Middle High German underwent breaking during the transition to Early New High German: /i? y? u?/ → /a?? ??? a??/. In Yiddish, the diphthongization affected the long mid vowels as well: /?? o? ?? i? y? u?/ → /??? ??? ??? a?? a?? ???/
- MHG êwic → NHG ewig, Yiddish: ???????, romanized: eybik ("eternal")
- MHG h?ch → NHG hoch, Yiddish: ?????, romanized: hoykh ("high")
- MHG sch?ne → NHG sch?n, Yiddish: ?????, romanized: sheyn ("nice")
- MHG sn?den → NHG schneiden, Yiddish: ??????, romanized: shnaydn ("to cut")
- MHG vriunt → NHG Freund, Yiddish: ????????, romanized: fraynd ("friend")
- MHG h?t → NHG Haut, Yiddish: ????, romanized: hoyt ("skin")
This change started as early as the 12th century in Upper Bavarian and reached Moselle Franconian only in the 16th century. It did not affect Alemannic or Ripuarian dialects, which still retain the original long vowels.
In Yiddish, the diphthongization applied not only to MHG long vowels but also to /?? o?/ in words of Hebrew (in stressed open syllables) or Slavic origin:
- Hebrew: ???, romanized: pésach → Yiddish: ????, romanized: peysekh ("Pesach")
- Hebrew: ?????, romanized: m'norá → Yiddish: ?????, romanized: mnoyre ("menorah")
- Old Czech: ch?ěn → Yiddish: ?????, romanized: khreyn ("chrain")
- Polish: kosz → Yiddish: ????, romanized: koysh ("basket")
Scottish Gaelic
editVowel breaking is present in Scottish Gaelic with the following changes occurring often but variably between dialects: Archaic Irish e? → Scottish Gaelic i? and Archaic Irish o? → Scottish Gaelic u? [7] Specifically, central dialects have more vowel breaking than others.
Romance languages
editMany Romance languages underwent vowel breaking. The Vulgar Latin open vowels e /?/ and o /?/ in stressed position underwent breaking only in open syllables in French and Italian, but in both open and closed syllables in Spanish. Vowel breaking was mostly absent in Catalan, in which /?/ and /?/ became diphthongs only before a palatal consonant: Latin coxa 'thigh', octō 'eight', lectum 'bed' > Old Catalan */kuoi?a/, */uoit/, */lieit/. The middle vowel was subsequently lost if a triphthong was produced: Modern Catalan cuixa, vuit, llit (cf. Portuguese coxa, oito, leito). Vowel breaking was completely absent in Portuguese. The result of breaking varies between languages: e and o became ie and ue in Spanish, ie and uo in Italian and ie and eu /?/ in French.
In the table below, words with breaking are bolded.
| Syllable shape | Latin | Spanish | French | Italian | Portuguese | Catalan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open | petram, focum | piedra, fuego | pierre, feu | pietra, fuoco | pedra, fogo | pedra, foc |
| Closed | festam, portam | fiesta, puerta | fête, porte | festa, porta | festa, porta | festa, porta |
Romanian
editRomanian underwent the general Romance breaking only with /?/, as it did not have /?/:
- Latin pellis > Romanian piele "skin"
It underwent a later breaking of stressed e and o to ea and oa before a mid or open vowel:
- Latin porta > Romanian poart? "gate"
- Latin flōs (stem flōr-) > Romanian floare "flower"
Sometimes a word underwent both forms of breaking in succession:
- Latin petra > Early Romanian pietr? > Romanian piatr? "stone" (where ia results from hypothetical *iea)
The diphthongs that resulted from the Romance and the Romanian breakings were modified when they occurred after palatalized consonants.
Quebec French
editIn Quebec French, long vowels are generally diphthongized when followed by a consonant in the same syllable (even when a final [?] is optionally made silent).
- tard [tɑ??] → [tɑ???]; but not in tardif (because short a)
- père [p???] → [pa???]
- fleur [fl???] → [fl????]; but not in fleuriste (long ? is at end of syllable)
- fort [f???] → [fɑ???]; but not forte (short o)
- autre [o?t??] → [ou?t??]; but not autrement (long o is at end of syllable)
- neutre [n??t??] → [n?y?t??]; but not neutralité (long ? is at end of syllable)
- pince [p???s] → [p???s]; or [p??s] → [p????s]; but not pincer
- onze [??z] → [????z]; but not onzième
Proto-Indo-European
editSome scholars[8] believe that Proto-Indo-European (PIE) i, u had vowel-breaking before an original laryngeal in Greek, Armenian and Tocharian but that the other Indo-European languages kept the monophthongs:
- PIE *g?ih3wos → *g?ioHwos "alive" → Gk. ζω?? zōós, Toch. B ?āw-, ?āy- (but Skt. jīvá-, Lat. vīvus)
- PIE *protih3k?om → *protioHk?om "front side" → Gk. πρ?σωπον prósōpon "face", Toch. B pratsāko "breast" (but Skt. prátīka-)
- PIE *duh2ros → *duaHros "long" → Gk. δηρ?? dērós, Arm. *twār → erkar (Skt. dūrá-, Lat. dūrus).
However, the hypothesis has not been widely adopted.
Austronesian languages
editSome languages in Sumatra have vowel breaking processes, almost exclusively in syllable-final position. In Minangkabau, the Proto-Malayic vowels *i and *u are broken to ia and ua before word-final *h, *k, *l, *?, *r (*t?lur > *t?luar > talua "egg").[9] In Rejang, the Proto-Malayo-Polynesian vowels *?, i, and u are broken to êa, ea, and oa before any of word-final consonants above except *k and *? (*t?nur > *t?noar > tênoa "egg").[10] This process has been transphonologized by loss of *l and *r and merging of several word-final consonants into a glottal stop (*p, *t, *k in Minangkabau, or *k, *h in most dialects of Rejang except Kebanagung).
Word-final Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *-i and *-u were also broken in Sumatra. In Rejang, these vowels are broken into -ai and -au in Pesisir dialect, or into -êi and -êu elsewhere.[10]
Although Acehnese is also spoken in Sumatra, the entire Chamic family has undergone vowel breaking separately. Final open *-i and *-u were broken in Proto-Chamic into *-?y and *-?w. However, they remained when closed by another consonant (final *-r was lost in native words). The following are the outcomes for the diphthongs:[11]
| Acehnese | Rade | Jarai | Chru | Northern Roglai | Tsat | Western Cham | Phan Rang Cham | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| *?y | ?? | ?i | ?i | ai | ay | ??y | ||
| *?w | ?? | ?u | ?u | au~? | au | ??w | ||
Following its split from Proto-Chamic, several daughter languages have undergone further vowel breaking. In Acehnese, *a: normally became ??, but when preceded by a nasal, it became ? instead.[12]
See also
editReferences
edit- ^ The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
- ^ Kathryn LaBouff, Singing and Communicating in English, Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 268.
- ^ Robert B. Howell 1991. Old English breaking and its Germanic analogues (Linguistische Arbeiten, 253.). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer
- ^ J. Svensson, Diftongering med palatalt f?rslag i de nordiska spr?ken, Lund 1944.
- ^ H. Paul, "Zur Geschichte des germanischen Vocalismus", Beitr?ge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Kultur 6 (1879) 16-30.
- ^ K. M. Nielsen, Acta Philologica Scandinavica 24 (1957) 33-45.
- ^ Martin John Ball, James Fife (1993). The Celtic Languages. Psychology Press. p. 152. ISBN 9780415010351.
- ^ F. Normier, in: Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 91 (1977) 171-218; J.S. Klein, in: Die Laryngaltheorie und die Rekonstruktion des indogermanischen Laut- und Formensystems, Heidelberg 1988, 257-279; Olsen, Birgit Anette, in: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Armenian linguistics, Cleveland's State University, Cleveland, Ohio, September 14–18, 1991, Delmar (NY) 1992, 129-146; J.E. Rasmussen, in: Selected Papers on Indo-European Linguistics, Copenhagen 1999, 442-458.
- ^ Adelaar, K. Alexander (1992). Proto-Malayic: The Reconstruction of its Phonology and Parts of its Lexicon and Morphology. Pacific Linguistics, Series C, no. 119. Canberra: Dept. of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University. doi:10.15144/PL-C119. hdl:1885/145782. ISBN 978-0-85883-408-8.
- ^ a b "Some Irregular Reflexes of Proto-Malayo-Polynesian Vowels in the Rejang Language of Sumatra" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2025-08-06.
- ^ Thurgood 1999, p. 114.
- ^ Thurgood 1999, p. 124.
Bibliography
edit- Crowley, Terry. (1997) An Introduction to Historical Linguistics. 3rd edition. Oxford University Press.
- Thurgood, Graham (1999). From Ancient Cham to Modern Dialects: Two Thousand Years of Language Contact and Change: With an Appendix of Chamic Reconstructions and Loanwords. Oceanic Linguistics Special Publications. University of Hawai'i Press. pp. i, iii–vii, ix–xiii, xv–xvii, 1–259, 261–275, 277–397, 399–407. ISBN 0824821319. JSTOR 20006770.